I'm sorry but "Google" as a verb sounds like it should be bad (or at least illicit)

I would take a moment to thank Google for increasing traffic to my little site here on Thursday. I would, except it appears to have been an error on their part, so all I can say to all the people who inadvertently visited here on that day: Sorry I didn't have a picture of the Last Supper.

When checking the site meter I noticed a dramatic (like four times usual) spike in visitors on the 31st of May. Considering that all I posted around there were links to my photo site, I found this odd. Upon reviewing the details of the visits, I found many of them were referred by Google. Specifically (from what I can tell), from people clicking on a link for an image of Da Vinci's "The Last Supper" that should have taken them to a site that does reproductions of famous paintings.

Judging from the length of stay for each of these hits (0 seconds), none of those who clicked and hit part of my site stayed--and I cannot blame them; I would have hit the Back button immediately myself.

I will note that to the image in question I did link in this post, but I never had the image here. (Heck, that post wasn't even about the painting; it was merely an allusion.) However, the part of the site to which visitors from Google were directed was to the category page for that post, not even to that specific post. Apparently, however, that was sufficient to make this site where Google thought searchers should go, although only for a day.

When I did a search for images of the Last Supper and saw one with the site name I saw mentioned in the referring URL in question, it was today pointing to a different site that had nothing to do with the painting either. It's quite possible that site had a link to the same image somewhere on it; I didn't bother to check.

I'm not one to bite the hand that feeds (given Google's ownership of Blogger) but I suddenly find myself more inclined to search using Ask's vaunted algorithm.